Ah, the user referred to in my post was the same as the last one you mentioned, Martin. Looking at all of these, I've got to say, it doesn't look like cheating as much as a miscalculation in whatever process asks for and/or grants credit. I wonder if the machines we're looking at are seriously overclocked. And if so, why it doesn't generate an error on the WU. Questions, questions.

Ah, the user referred to in my post was the same as the last one you mentioned, Martin. Looking at all of these, I've got to say, it doesn't look like cheating as much as a miscalculation in whatever process asks for and/or grants credit. I wonder if the machines we're looking at are seriously overclocked. And if so, why it doesn't generate an error on the WU. Questions, questions.

Somebody needs to be looking at these, right soonish.

i hope to have the validator updated sometime today, and it should be generating fixed credit per amount of work done, calculated by how many stars are in the work unit and the size of the volume. this should fix these abnormalities.

Ah, the user referred to in my post was the same as the last one you mentioned, Martin. Looking at all of these, I've got to say, it doesn't look like cheating as much as a miscalculation in whatever process asks for and/or grants credit. I wonder if the machines we're looking at are seriously overclocked. And if so, why it doesn't generate an error on the WU. Questions, questions.

Somebody needs to be looking at these, right soonish.

i hope to have the validator updated sometime today, and it should be generating fixed credit per amount of work done, calculated by how many stars are in the work unit and the size of the volume. this should fix these abnormalities.

Stop the filedeleter and run a script to recalculate existing credits, there are some with 600-700k credits/WU!

This person is also very questionable: Account data for Jenik How can he have a RAC of more that 40,000 credits when there is a work unit limit of 2,000 work units/day?

Now here is a weird result: Result ID: 491638 Granted credit: 787537.651434724 for 272 seconds of work?

Travis, can you reduce the credits of two hosts got 2x250k and 700k credits / WU? These are the 2 ones on top computer list, we must fair enough but there are many other too but not so extremely.

after we get the binaries updated i'll be doing this :)

Thx :)

As another update to this, i've mailed the boinc_dev mailing list to see if i can find any cleaner way of doing this since more than a few results have gotten a lot more credit then perhaps they should have.

What´s wrong ? A client state file can be manually edited ? It ´s a joke ? Why system hasn´t a barrier for this ? Don´t sleep, admins :-) Can you do anything with this ?

not sleeping, the problem is that there arent "client state files" and the credit is awarded somewheres in the database and i have to figure out exactly all the places i need to update and remove credit in there to keep the server running and all the stats pages working correctly :) i wish it was so easy *lol*

I mean this in an Alpha project where to many seems to have gotten in just for showing off their abilities in manipulating the poor Boinc rewarding credit system and the credits wasn't fixed by the server.

Since I'm waiting on the binary issue, i've gone into the database and have reset a few of the users credit who got incorrect credit granted. unfortunately the top lists aren't reflecting this change even after i updated them... not quite sure whats going on yet but i'm working on it.

I've gone through the database and fixed all the anomalies i could find. It looks like i got them all, and updated the users and teams correctly. If some people and teams lost more credit than they should have I apologize -- I just learned mysql this afternoon on the internet to get this done :P now that credit is at a fixed rate things should run along smoothly and most of this will become inconsequential as the project gets older (or at least I can hope that).